On Sat, 2010-03-20 at 13:33 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
> Ben Hutchings <ben@decadent.org.uk> writes:
> > On Sat, 2010-03-20 at 12:03 -0700, Russ Allbery wrote:
>
> >> The primary problem with using OpenSSL with OpenLDAP is NSS and PAM
> >> modules, which pull the libraries into just about any GPL'd (or
> >> other-licensed) package in the distribution in one way or another.
> > [...]
>
> > Applications that use NSS/PAM, and individual NSS/PAM modules, are
> > useful without the other and it is a matter of user configuration
> > whether they are used together at all. The OpenLDAP modules are not
> > used by default. So I don't see that copyleft licences of applications
> > using NSS/PAM can possibly extend to them.
>
> My understanding is that that's not the standard that Debian has
> historically applied, and I don't think it's particularly useful for
> anyone who isn't a lawyer (such as myself) to debate it.
[...]
It also isn't very useful for us to spend a lot of time working around a
legal issue that doesn't exist, so this may well be a case where it is
worth asking for legal advice through SPI.
Ben.
--
Ben Hutchings
Power corrupts. Absolute power is kind of neat.
- John Lehman, Secretary of the US Navy 1981-1987
Attachment:
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part